There is a lack of clarity regarding the broad reach of the legislation and the specific impacts it would have on residents.

There has been no time for the public to address their many concerns regarding the exclusive deals being offered to this one commercial concern at the expense or the public use of public streets.

Other city agencies such as the Fire Department, and other emergency officials have not officially weighed in on the possible negative effects such parking allowance may have on their ability to do their jobs.

There has not been time for discussion with care-givers and other essential service providers over how their “rights” to park in RPP zone may be effected by this legislation.

The public is not aware of any concerns that may have been voiced by Muni drivers, pedestrians, or the public over the proposals to reverse the daylighting program.

There has not been time for competing commercial interests to review and comment on the effects such an “exclusive” deal may have on their interests.

There is some confusion over which vehicles rented by Scoot may park in tow-away “daylight” zones, which rules may apply to non-scooter limited range, Scoot vehicles,

Why is Scoot allowed special parking privileges that are not extended to other “share-vehicle” rentals and private-owned electric scooter owners?

There is some confusion over the meaning of the term “Limited Range Vehicle”.

No studies have been done to prove any of the claims made that people who “share Scoots” for a fee, will get out of cars.

Providing special privileges to Scoot and other two-wheeled vehicles discriminates against the elderly and physically disabled people who cannot safely ride such vehicles.

Please take these matters into considerations and continue this matter for at least 60 days to give the public time to review and respond to this proposed legislation.